|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|
Re: [PLUG] OT: ...compatible browser or else!
|
> > Probably right, but let's do the cost benefit analysis. I'm betting
> > that if they sold one auto, they could get a site that was more
> > compatible. It's not like it's too expensive to do this right, so we
> > can forget about that. It's not like millions of people have to be
> > affected, either.
> >
> > If the people who did the job were really qualified to begin w/ then
> > we wouldn't be having this problem.
> >
> > Here's my calculations: better site cost = $0
>
> No. Better site cost = amt of time spent rewriting x hourly cost of
> the HTML designers ... which, if they outsource their web page, could
^^^^
> be noticable, especially if they have to examine multiple sub-pages.
My point was that if this were valid html to begin w/ then it would have
been accessible all ready. They were writing in MS-only protocols. So they
should have said that they were writing MS-only pages not _web_ pages.
Calling an MS-only page a _web_ page written in _html_ is a lie.
Or did MS somehow design the html spec and are the linux people willfully
ignorant of this fact. :)
Fred
______________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group - http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements-http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug
|
|